They are quite distinct now, yes. But much of what the Unifying Force is described, is how the Force was described before they introduced the concept of The Unifying Force. Yes it was called the Light Side of the Force, but many of the qualities given to the Unifying Force was also given to the Light Side. Allowing the Force to guide you wasn't created once the Prequels came around, but had been used rather often by Luke and a couple other Jedi years before.

It would have been very easy to say that the Light Side of the Force as described in the books that take place after the movies was The Unifying Force but by a different name. Something that Luke did by mistake, which is easy to believe since he was only partially trained before Ben and Yoda died.

Here's something that you posted Sekot saying.

Quote:

But in serving the Force we recognize that we are all the same thing; that when we act in accordance with the Force we act in accordance with the wish of all life to enlarge itself, to rise out of physicality and become something greater.

That fits perfectly with the way Luke acted in regards to the Light Side of the Force several times.

As I said, yes there are some differences, but that's bound to happen when you have so many people working on an on-going series of books like this. By making the Light Side of the Force and the Unifying Force separate the way they did (something I don't think Lucas really did in the movies), it added a layer that I do not believe was needed and will only create confusion in many readers, especially since at least in Verege's case the author wanted her to be vague.

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 8:21 pm

Message

Crash OverrideMaster

Joined: 22 Dec 2010Posts: 1962

Werehunter wrote:

They are quite distinct now, yes. But much of what the Unifying Force is described, is how the Force was described before they introduced the concept of The Unifying Force. Yes it was called the Light Side of the Force, but many of the qualities given to the Unifying Force was also given to the Light Side. Allowing the Force to guide you wasn't created once the Prequels came around, but had been used rather often by Luke and a couple other Jedi years before.

It would have been very easy to say that the Light Side of the Force as described in the books that take place after the movies was The Unifying Force but by a different name. Something that Luke did by mistake, which is easy to believe since he was only partially trained before Ben and Yoda died.

Here's something that you posted Sekot saying.

Quote:

But in serving the Force we recognize that we are all the same thing; that when we act in accordance with the Force we act in accordance with the wish of all life to enlarge itself, to rise out of physicality and become something greater.

That fits perfectly with the way Luke acted in regards to the Light Side of the Force several times.

As I said, yes there are some differences, but that's bound to happen when you have so many people working on an on-going series of books like this. By making the Light Side of the Force and the Unifying Force separate the way they did (something I don't think Lucas really did in the movies), it added a layer that I do not believe was needed and will only create confusion in many readers, especially since at least in Verege's case the author wanted her to be vague.

The way that the light side was previously depicted was the same way it is depicted now, IMO. And it's downright inconsistent in terms of an organization like the Jedi in comparison to the Fallanassi. The author of the Black Fleet trilogy evidently had some idea of the deeper meaning to the original trilogy instead of falling into the trap of simplifying it the way that WEG, because the Fallanassi are the perfect example of a "light side organization" to contrast with the Jedi. The Jedi use violence, which is technically "dark." The light side is creation, the dark side is destruction. The Jedi aren't purely of one or the other, but try to stay balanced with the Force the way that the life cycle is balanced between the two extremes.

The Fallanassi go too far toward the light side, and as pacifists do absolutely nothing. When the Sith took over, they did nothing, and the Force remains out of balance if they were the only hope to do anything. The Jedi are more like the Unifying Force vis-a-vis the will of the Force, working to keep the Force balanced.

And I didn't get the vibe of that Sekot quote out of Luke's Jedi in Bantam... they were more about doing the self-perceived "right thing" than about service to the Force, and there was a definite Manichean dualism applied to the light and dark side with the Jedi being light side crusaders against the dark siders. Especially in books like Young Jedi Knights, they're all about moral lessons and that sort of thing. Those books just took on and injected a decidedly western slant into the Force in contrast to its more eastern depiction in the films, prequel EU, and NJO.

Edit: I can definitely see your point, and I agree to an extent that the distinction is minor, but there is a distinction. Whereas under Bantam the dark side is sort of the unnatural component to the Force that needs to be eliminated, the Force as depicted in the NJO and films is more about the individual placing his or her ego ahead of the collective and exerting his or her will, greed, and desires onto others. The light side is definitely more conducive toward maintaining balance than the dark side, as seen in the Mortis trilogy, because it's much more benign, but it's not balance in and of itself.

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 8:30 pm

Message

WerehunterKnight

Joined: 08 Apr 2011Posts: 362

As for Young Jedi Knights, of course they were more about the moral choices. It was a book geared at young adults/kids. Pretty much each book had some great moral lesson.

And the Fallanassi did go too far, but I never thought about it too far towards the light side. The way it is now, I'd agree but not back then when it came out.

I also wouldn't say the darkside of the force is destruction, at least not in the Bantam books. Back then it was more about twisting the force to selfish means. I always look at the Dark Side of the Force not as a separate thing, but rather something created when someone twists and corrupts the Force for their own purposes. And becoming twisted and corrupt themselves in the process.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Personally I'm happy it's largely been ignored.

Edit to comment on your edit.

THe Bantam books didn't have many dark side users. They really flourished after the books switched to Del Ray. At least for the post movies books, I can only think of a handful of examples. Jorrus for the Thrawn Trilogy. The Nightsisters for Courtship of Princess Leia, Exar Kun, and the Dark Jedi Academy in th Young Jedi Knights books.

Though I guess the comics likely had more but I've barely read any of them and don't think Bantam read or made much use of them.

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 8:36 pm

Message

Crash OverrideMaster

Joined: 22 Dec 2010Posts: 1962

Werehunter wrote:

As for Young Jedi Knights, of course they were more about the moral choices. It was a book geared at young adults/kids. Pretty much each book had some great moral lesson.

And the Fallanassi did go too far, but I never thought about it too far towards the light side. The way it is now, I'd agree but not back then when it came out.

I also wouldn't say the darkside of the force is destruction, at least not in the Bantam books. Back then it was more about twisting the force to selfish means. I always look at the Dark Side of the Force not as a separate thing, but rather something created when someone twists and corrupts the Force for their own purposes. And becoming twisted and corrupt themselves in the process.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Personally I'm happy it's largely been ignored.

The problem with the Bantam depiction is this: it creates a direct correspondence between three distinct things:

Sith (Or Dark Jedi) = Dark Side = Evil

Jedi = Light Side = Good

The dark side, in and of itself, isn't wholly evil. It's the natural destructive part of the Force that's necessary for the life cycle. The Son, the embodiment of the dark side in the Mortis trilogy, loved his sister. Likewise, the Daughter was less benign than the Fallanassi and fought her brother to preserve balance. Each of their symbols has the other's inside it, similar to yin yang:

Now, the Sith, on the other hand, generally tend to be evil. I'm not going to make a blanket statement in case someone throws us a curveball in the EU, but Lucas suggests they are so it's probably a necessary attribute. They're the dark side in excess, they're all about destruction, but that's a side effect of their egotism and will, and the way they force that onto others.

And perhaps an argument could be made that Luke's Jedi are thus more in line with Daughter than Father in that regard, and the boon of Jacen's hero's journey was that ability to take on the Father role.

As for moving away from it, I think what we have now with the post-NJO literature is a lot worse than even Bantam, because some of the writers have adopted the stance that the protagonists of the story are simply protagonists because the writers chose for them to be, and so they can get away with doing morally questionable things just like the antagonists, but hey it's okay because they're the heroes!

And then we've got stuff like Mortis which basically lays it out.

Edit: Quite a few Bantam novels had dark siders:
Thrawn trilogy; Joruus C'Baoth
TCoPL: Gethzerion
Jedi Academy: Exar Kun
The Crystal Star: Hethrir
Children of the Jedi: The Ismarens
Planet of Twilight: Beldorian
The New Rebellion: Hethrir and Brakiss

I should also note when I say Bantam I mean the general EU c. 1983-1998, including the West End Games RPG which originated the misinterpretation with its extreme dark side points system.

I actually believe it's plausible that Lucas had the idea in mind even when he was producing the original trilogy, because there's no mention of a "light side" in any of those movies anywhere. The Jedi are allied with the Force, not its light side.

Seriously? I'll have to look for it next time I watch the OT.

The closest it gets is the Ben hut scene, and Luke talking to Leia in ROTJ about bringing their father back to the 'good' side._________________I am a Star Wars fan. That doesn't mean that I hate or love Jar Jar. That doesn't mean I hate or love Lucas, or agree or disagree 100% with him. That doesn't mean I prefer the PT over the OT, or vice versa. That doesn't mean I hate the EU, or even love all of it (or even read all of it). These are not prerequisites. Being a man is not a prerequisite. Being a geek is not a prerequisite. The only prerequisite is that I love something about Star Wars. I am a Star Wars fan.

Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 3:56 pm

Message

Crash OverrideMaster

Joined: 22 Dec 2010Posts: 1962

Perhaps I should make a cliff notes version of this thread in which I simply provide pertinent quotations that theoretically would be sufficient to make the message clear without any sort of additional explanation on my part.